In re Marilyn H. CA2/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 16, 2023B321485California4,074 words

Opinion

Opinion

Lavin, J.

INTRODUCTION

This is Karina H.’s (mother) third appeal in dependency proceedings involving her six-year-old daughter Marilyn. In the first appeal, we affirmed the juvenile court’s jurisdiction findings and disposition order declaring Marilyn a dependent of the court and removing the child from mother’s custody due in part to mother’s mental health issues. (In re Marilyn H. (Nov. 17, 2020, B302057) [nonpub. opn.] (Marilyn I).) In the second appeal, we affirmed the court’s findings and order terminating mother’s reunification services. (In re Marilyn H. (July 22, 2021, B308251) [nonpub. opn.] (Marilyn II).) In this appeal, mother argues that the court committed reversible error by failing to allow mother to tell the court why she wished to replace her court-appointed counsel with private counsel at her Welfare and Institutions Code1 section 366.26 hearing (the .26 hearing). Mother suggests this was tantamount to denying a request for a Marsden2 hearing. Because mother was free to engage private counsel at any time, no Marsden hearing was required. We also perceive no abuse of discretion in the court’s denial of mother’s request for a continuance of the .26 hearing, made on the date…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.